Interesting Ferrari numbers..

[Alex Mc]

Racing the EuroFighter, Schumi's F2003-GA on a wet surface covered:

600m in 9.4s (+9.4)
900m in 13.2s (+3.8)
1200m in 16.7s (+3.5)

600 meters is a distance 25% FURTHER than a quarter mile! Anyway, i know that acceleration is anything but linear, and i'm not a physics major... BUT.. it took him 3.8 seconds to cover the 300m from 600 to 900 meters, and 3.5 seconds from 900 to 1200 meters.

So, for kicks assuming 100m of acceleration (9.4/600) took 1.566s then the quarter mile (~402.35m) would be like 6.3 seconds. Certainly he spent a good deal of time getting traction at the lower speeds too.

My point is, jesus christ F1 cars are fast as balls. I can't imagine what that 0-600m time would have been in the dry!!!

But the Jet still spanks it.. hopefully this is a sign of things to come next season!

My car with the cover off:


I love how he's looking over at the jet right here.. i guess not too many lines to focus on


My weekend toys:


Say cheese!

[klasic]

alex have you seen any high rez pics from that?

and also that is some impressive info, I wonder how different the numbers would be in the dry

[tdc]

WHOA.

[Jonte]

Well 600meter is ~50% longer than a quarter mile(402.33 meters) so yes it`s really quite impressive

[MorningCruiser]

Hm, anyone know what the plates are for just aft of the oxygen intakes? I don't quite remember, but they're to increase low speed ability and high speed maneuvering if I remember correctly. Mostly because jets have this bad tendency to be pigs at low speeds and at high speed there is too much resistance to maveuver quickly without breaking stuff (standard control surfaces)

[Kevin]

god I love F1 cars. I wish I could find a video of the race. 600 meters in 9.4 seconds in the wet is ridiculous. I wish they would have timed at the 400 mark (or the 1320 ft mark for that matter). I heard that some time ago(4 or 5 years ago maybe) a F1 team did a 1/4 mile test and went 8.8 @ some ridiculous trap like 180 or something. Drag cars running 180 mph trap speeds are well into the 7s. For lack of a better comparison, at an average track, NHRA Pro Stock cars run 6.8-6.9 @ 197-205 mph, so I doubt F1 cars are anywhere near the 6 sec range, but that 600 meter time tempts me to believe so.

[jonsibal]

unbelievable... any video of that run?

[NarutoRamen]

Holy sh!t....that is ****!ng fast. I knew that F1 cars were fast...but damn...that sh!t is ridiculous. I wish they would've done it when it was dry....that would have been much better.

[Jonte]

Go here for a little video of it, it`s in Swedish though.
http://wwwb.aftonbladet.se/vss/strea...vdelningslage=

[Alex Mc]

Excuse me, i meant 50% further - not 25% - than a 1/4 mile distance. 400m X 150% = 600m.

Ian, nope.. haven't seen any high-rez shots yet but someone is bound to have a few at some point. I'll keep checking F1-live.

Kevin, yeah the Jaguar R1(?) car was test by C&D i believe, and if i recall, it ran a 9.4@181mph. And that was a blowsy Cosworth engine years ago.. probably not even making 750+hp versus the 920 or so everyone is claiming now.

MorningCruiser- Which ones are you talking about?

The large shaped one over the rear tire (#1, Yellow circle) is he integrated element on the rear of the sidepod is called "rear flipup," which simply deflects air over the rear tire for cleaner flow. Downforce is not the idea here, just minimizing drag.

The smaller one ahead of the flip-up (#2 blue circle) that looks like a miniature wing is exactly that, a "winglet." These serve various pursposes.. creating small amounts of downforce, and directing flow away from the rear wing. If you note the second image head-on with the winglet you can see the pressure gradient increasing as you move outwards towards the side of the car (left looking at it). This provides downforce on the outer side of the car as well as a more severe vortex due to the endplate, but again- we're diverting dirty air off the front of the car away from the rear wing. The inside of the winglet is smoother without an endplate, which minimizes vortices and smooths air away from the rear wing. Renault also used this on the R23 to create a low-pressure zone in order to assist hot air extraction from the radiator chimneys. The third image will give you an idea of the horizontal plane..

The trend next year (as seen in the #4 picture, which is the '04 McLaren MP4/19) will be shorter, less drastic winglets due to the extremely tight coke-bottle rear ends that really give the rear wing clean flow and even further reduction of vortex creation.

The green circle in #1 is the exhaust outlet for the sidepods (thats where the radiators are) as well as the exhaust manifolds. Very hot area.. the idea is to get the air below the wing though, not on top of it. With the teeny rear section of the 2003-GA Ferrari has set the standard with this design (with a wild gearbox, angled radiators, and other trick developments). Everyone will look like this next year.. the new McLaren is even more radical.

Hope that helps!

1- Ferrari F2003-GA launch photo


2- Ferrari F2003-GA launch photo


3- Ferrari F2003-GA launch photo


4- 2004 McLaren/Mercerdes MP4/19 chassis

[Sulax34]

Wow, that is awesome.....I want one! Actually, if you are rich enough, you might just be able to get your hands on one:

http://www.caranddriver.com/article....rticle_id=7605

[NarutoRamen]

$1,063,000.......in my dreams....damn I tell my self that one day i'll be rich enough to buy a 150-200k car...but a million thats pushing it...even for my wild ass imagination...but i guess no more using my brain....it's time to start praying to the gods

[X5 Gee]

can someone explain these times in feet. Not meters. thanks ..

[jaypod]

Originally posted by X5GEE
can someone explain these times in feet. Not meters. thanks ..

1 meter = 3.28 ft - I'd do the conversion for you but I am too lazy!

[Alex Mc]

1 meter = 39.37 inches = 3.28 feet = 1.09 yards

600m = 1968ft = 656 yards = .37 miles

402.33m = 1320ft = 440 yards = .25 miles